🚀 go-pugleaf

Colin B Maharaj wrote:

> I was wondering if this is faster and just as
>safe as IntToStr.

Ummm, No.
IntToStr returns a new AnsiString.
Your function relies on the user supplying a sufficiently large char
array so you don't accidentally overflow it.

It is, however, as safe as itoa.

>My little speed test says it is twice as fast
>as itoa and 3 time as fast as IntToStr,
>however itoa does hex and this does not!

Hex is even faster. Just write an itoh()

>Question is, do I need to be pushing any
>registers on the stack to save and restore
>on exit?

EAX
ECX
EDX
Those are the only "free" registers.
All others must be preserved.

>I think by wrapping it in a C function, I will
>not have to worry about enter/exit ASM code (?)

Compile it and look at the cpu view to see if the compiler added the
stackframe code.
I think if it were pure asm, no C code inside, you would want to take
care of things, but only if your code requires it.

I wonder if dividing by 100 instead of 10, and using AAM to get the 2
digit result would be any faster

So, you write to string in reverse order, then strrev()
Another way is to push the digits onto stack, then pop/store to
string.